Object Reference in Variable?

[Richard Gaskin]

Eric Chatonet wrote:

> In a previous post, you asked me what I thought about Win ribbons and  
> I did not reply :-(
> Probably should we discuss about this off list 

I'm hoping the folks here find this relevant, though if anyone expresses 
annoyance I'm happy to move it offline.

While we're all scripters, we're also all interface designers.  And for 
better or worse, I think it's safe to say that the Ribbon is the biggest 
UI change we've seen in probably more than a decade, and one of the more 
comprehensively researched ones, so at very least it's good to be 
familiar with the methodology that led to the choice (even if only to 
avoid it <g>, though I think it has at least some merit).


> here are my first  
> feelings:
> Actually, ribbons seem to be a kind of 'visual' contextual menus eg  
> buttons dedicated to appropriate tasks in a given context.
> If it sounds good from a technocratic point of view, I'm afraid that  
> users who need to 'recognize' an interface, are finally confused when  
> all change because you have bolded a word :-)

Fortunately the level of granularity seems less fine. :)

True, the central premise is that they avoid the clutter and cryptic 
small icons of earlier toolbars by using larger, more descriptive 
labels.  To accommodate the much-larger space requirements they employ 
progressive disclosure, showing only the set of tools available for a 
given set of tasks that make sense in the current context of the workflow.

 From the videos and descriptions/screen shots I've seen (I don't buy MS 
products myself when I can avoid them), it seems this dynamic switching
of controls in the Ribbon occurs only on major context shifts, like 
changing the view mode or adding graphics, rather than in response to 
small gestures like selecting text.

Even with that, admittedly there is a risk.  Up there with progressive 
disclosure on the list of cardinal principles is also consistency, and a 
dynamic toolbar may hinder or at least slow the development of muscle 
memory in selecting controls.

I don't have measurements offhand for how one should appropriately 
weight consistency over progressive disclosure, but when I corresponded 
with Tog a while back on a related topic (the placement of dialog 
buttons, another story) he seemed to rank consistency very highly, even 
above natural reading-order, with regard to control layouts.


> So, at first sight, a good idea but, from a cognitive psychology  
> point of view :-) I'm not sure it's so good.
> In addition, I don't like software that claim every minute 'I'm  
> clever' but I prefer software that make the user claim 'Finally I'm  
> really good' :-)
>  From a cognitive psychology point of view :-)
> Sure you understand...

I believe so.  We've all suffered through Clippy. :)

For those of you who haven't been reading Jensen Harris' blog on the 
evolution of Office 12, he now has a video there of a presentation he 
did which summarizes the design and its evolution succinctly:

<http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/>

Dan Shafer first turned me on to that blog with a post he made here 
shortly after Neilsen wrote about it.  I've been reading it since - 
thanks, Dan!

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com